public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
To: David Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Langote <[email protected]>
Cc: Jonathan S. Katz <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 22:30:17 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKJS1f_c8tngWJZjNcQY0KXHWVs4JZxyzoX_cGBEHbaWKUAC=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKJS1f-pCFYGq1-go+ZyAR3GisQo-nTD=7E8ykk7Zqm9w+-OkA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAKJS1f_c8tngWJZjNcQY0KXHWVs4JZxyzoX_cGBEHbaWKUAC=w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 01:38:49PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2019 at 03:36, Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yes, it does.  I added this text and moved the commit item:
> >
> >         Avoid sorting when partitions are already being scanned in the
> >         necessary order (David Rowley)
> 
> Thank you for moving that out.
> 
> > I certainly strugged to understand the maze of commits related to
> > partitioning.
> 
> With the utmost respect, because I certainly do appreciate the work
> you did on the release note, I think if that's the case, then it
> should only make you more willing to listen to the advice from the
> people who are closer to those commits.  However I understand that
> consistency is also important, so listening to the heckling of
> individuals sometimes won't lead to a good overall outcome.  That
> being said, I don't think that's what happened here, as most of the
> people who had a gripe about it were pretty close to the work that was
> done.
> 
> FWIW, I do think the release notes should be meant as a source of
> information which give a brief view on changes made that have a
> reasonable possibility of affecting people (either negative or
> positively) who are upgrading. Leaving out important details because
> they might confuse a small group of people seems wrong-headed, as it
> means the people who are not in that group are left to look at the
> commit history to determine what's changed, or worse, they might just
> assume that the thing has not changed which could either cause them to
> 1) Skip the upgrade because it's not interesting to them, or; 2)
> having something break because we didn't list some incompatibility.
> I know you know better than most people that extracting a useful
> summary from the commit history is a pretty mammoth task, so I doubt
> we should put that upon the masses.

No one has suggested new wording, so I don't know what you are
complaining about.  In fact, the wording we have now is by Amit Langote.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[email protected]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +

view thread (63+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox